Royal Naval BD

[Mons 1914]

Guys, what do we think about this RN Battledress.


Thanks
Scott

[Mons 1914]

2.

[Mons 1914]

3.

[Adrian Stevenson]

Hi Scott, Navy BD does not turn up all that often. All the parts look original to me. The sewing to the insignia does not look great, but that does not mean it is not right.

Cheers, Ade.

[AndyD]

It looks like an ARP wardens tunic to me.

Kind regards,
Andy

[lnijherald]

I'm not too fond of inconsistant wear: shoulder titles look fresher than the combined ops patches. But I agree with Ade they look fine.

Cheers, Luc

[Adam H]

I don't know enough about RN BD to comment too much here. One observation though, the date "Feb 1944" somewhat looks like it's been written in ballpoint pen / biro. If so, that would raise a red flag for me!

[Mons 1914]

The inconsistent wear of the RN title against the Comb Ops patch doesn't look right to me, the sloppy sowing doesn't help.

Scott

[Jim Maclean]

My opinion is that this is a Civil Defence BD made to look Navy. The lable is pants. It wouldn't have survived one laundering unless ballpoint was better in those days

[Johann Anton]

Are there any navy BD's out there, that anyone would like to share? What type of chevrons would have been worn?

[Dave Alexander]

I know that RAF pilots used ballpoint during WW2, they didn't become available to the public 'til after the war. It's possible that someone in the RN got hold of one. They had only been in production, I think, since 1940.

[sabertasche]

Where is the belly button? I have nothing to add except a bad joke.

Greg

[SHEARING-CROSS]

HI there , interesting thread , to be fair a ` hands on ` is always best however i wish to add a few points , the combined ops signs are original ,no problem , but the navy titles im not 100% happy with this style ( the wide width printed type ) is the more copied one and they just dont look right but better photos would help , The battle dress its self is a big puzzle ,again better photos would help but i tend to agree its some form of civil defence issue ,thats not to say some naval type did not obtain one and use it.
firstly , just to make clear there is no such thing as ` naval battle dress` it is known as ` OFFICERS WORKING DRESS` and is just that a uniform produced for officers that was more functional that the normal officers service dress , these were not produced before 1944 ( not positive about the date but pretty certain ) and there is no ` other ranks ` equivalent any types encounted either original examples or in pre 1944 photos are army ones obtained then dyed , this was done often at unit level and not just individual basis . the label in the example shown ( change) wording ` coat ` is incorrect ?
the big give away is i have never encounted a genuine naval working dress jacket with a buckle fastner to the waist like on an army BD nor have any of my fellow collectors , i belive this was done deliberate but as yet not sure why , Instead of a bucke it has a short material flap secured by two or some times three buttons , if im honest going on the pictures shown i think this is cetainly a put together jacket but would love to have a ` hands on play` ,regards , Michael . 1st photo shows the button type waist belt with no buckle ,

[SHEARING-CROSS]

Normal type of label , similar to army bd labels and just like them the wording and fabric can vary , please note the correct title for the uniform .

[SHEARING-CROSS]

this label is out of a set of trousers but similar to the ones encounted in the jackets .